Would you be happy to classify that wasp as having “superhuman intelligence”?
No. It’s a wasp.
Then why accept that a machine which behaves like that wasp is superhumanly intelligent?
If it was a superhuman intelligence and it chose to do this for all eternity, I would probably still call it intelligent, the same way I’d still call a human an intelligent being even if it decided to do meth. If it truly self-modified to a while loop, I would be willing to call it non-intelligent, but if it was a complete program, and it just happened to be in an infinite loop, I’d say it’s still intelligent.
Very non-behaviorist, I know.
Even if it was just trying to store a big number, though, it could still exhibit intelligent behaviors—a machine that would do anything to tile the universe with its memory would probably exhibit superintelligent behaviors if presented with challenges.
Just because it’s smart doesn’t mean it has to want the same things we do, including novelty. http://www.personalityresearch.org/evolutionary/sphexishness.html
Would you be happy to classify that wasp as having “superhuman intelligence”?
Then why accept that a machine which behaves like that wasp is superhumanly intelligent?
No. It’s a wasp.
If it was a superhuman intelligence and it chose to do this for all eternity, I would probably still call it intelligent, the same way I’d still call a human an intelligent being even if it decided to do meth. If it truly self-modified to a while loop, I would be willing to call it non-intelligent, but if it was a complete program, and it just happened to be in an infinite loop, I’d say it’s still intelligent.
Very non-behaviorist, I know.
Even if it was just trying to store a big number, though, it could still exhibit intelligent behaviors—a machine that would do anything to tile the universe with its memory would probably exhibit superintelligent behaviors if presented with challenges.